To truely balance out a true government, every type of political ideology should have the same amount of air time when campaigning. No more big bloated contributions from big business or people with more money then morality. This democrat republican bullshit is old. America has fallen to a shitty 2 party system that is the same government no matter who's incontrol. Repub.'s say oh Dem's screwed it up and the Dems say oh the rep.'s screwed it up.. Hello idiots you have been the only two groups in the white house for the past umpteen years and its all been screwed up your just now realising your smoke and mirror bullshit cant cover the fetid stench you have created over the past 50 decades. Both parties are fucking dumb-asses.
A balanced government
- Thread starter monicasilver
- Start date
How about giving more power back to the lower governments, states and locals? That's the way our Federal system was supposed to work in the first place... and philosophically, the closer a governing body is to the people it answers to, the better!
And BTW, if the fall of the USSR was a lesson in anything, it was that a large country cannot be governed from a central location. :2 cents:
And BTW, if the fall of the USSR was a lesson in anything, it was that a large country cannot be governed from a central location. :2 cents:
Well, most of the states what are not drenched in oil proceeds and rich retirees is suffering financially too...not sure this would help.
Besides...who bails out the locals in the event they become overwhelmed by crisis or disaster?
id rather have a balanced breakfast to be honest... some bacon,an omlette with cheese and sausage and onions... homefries and a cup of joe... :drool2:
That isn't a balanced breakfast. :rofl2:
why isn't it? you got protein, fat (probably to much) and carbs. Besides portions it seems rather balanced.
Gov't does not and it's job is not to create jobs. The less gov't interference the better. You want anemic/flat economic growth? Let the federal gov't run things. I'm amazed there are people who still think that things should be centrally run after decades of other countries gov'ts failing in that endeavor.
The Gov't has no say/and should never have a say in creating jobs for the private sector. Gov't should also keep a minimal footprint in a free market economy. I cannot understand some people's fascination with socialist/communist economies. I've seen them myself.............they get 1st prize for shit poor service, poor quality, and inefficient wasteful methods of producing and delivering goods. Command economies do not work!
If BRAC closed Edwards AFB...the California towns of Lancaster, Palmdale and Rosamond would shrivel up faster than a sissy boys wiener in his dead, cold hands.
Never mind that, you mention 'military'. That should be broken down into two categories...the actual military and defense contractors.
Spending on defense contracts had allot to do with a portion of the economic rebound in the '80s.
Tell that to KBR, Blackwater Xe, and Haliburton.
If the government has no need to stimulate job growth, why do we give a fuck about unemployment numbers?
My contention was that "government" investing in infrastructure creates a its own job market to 1) put people to work 2) enhances services/way of life for all citizens 3) contributes to the security of the country 3) develops a higher skill set and efficiencies in the industry 4) pumps money in each city where work is done which in turn, stimulates the economy.
If you want modern-day Grapes of Wrath, go for it
Psst...dude. He knows this and knew it when you alluded to it in your previous post. But he just won't accept nor admit it since it doesn't align with his 'world view'.
Unless your questions are Socratic or rhetorical you're pissing in the wind expecting an honest answer or discussion with a guy who sees and end and will get there facts, truth or reason be damned.
Tell that to KBR, Blackwater Xe, and Haliburton.
If the government has no need to stimulate job growth, why do we give a fuck about unemployment numbers?
My contention was that "government" investing in infrastructure creates a its own job market to 1) put people to work 2) enhances services/way of life for all citizens 3) contributes to the security of the country 3) develops a higher skill set and efficiencies in the industry 4) pumps money in each city where work is done which in turn, stimulates the economy.
If you want modern-day Grapes of Wrath, go for it
The gov't purpose in not to create jobs in the private sector. The companies you listed are private firms bidding on a gov't contract.
We care about unemployment numbers because it is one economic indicator.
The State gov't can create work in the public sector but that is no guarantee of economic growth or wealth. People can be made to dig ditches and receive little pay. Little pay=low wealth which will not help the State's economy since people will not have much money to spend.
State and Federal gov'ts are incredibly inefficient.
You want breadlines, shortages, and higher prices for commodities? Let the gov't run everything.
It is a tough one, especially now. The bailouts are clearly the government intervening and picking who will win and who will not and it isn't a capitalistic action. Some think a bailout of Lehman could have prevented the whole thing.
Things get nasty without the bailouts and people are affected. It interferes with the Darwinistic nature of capitalism. If yo don't bailout GM, then you are allowing a big US industry crumble and affect thousands of GM workers and their supply line businesses. Bail them out and you make a mockery of the bankruptcy laws, wipe out some of the people and business that either owned (they would lose their ownership anyway) part of GM or have debt outstanding.
I think the right thing was done. However, I'm not sure that there is a belief that what was done was an extreme measure and not to be done often or taken lightly. Nothing is perfect and neither is the free market. I think we interfere with risk and should only do so as a last measure.
If this debt ceiling isn't raised, expect the government to be picking more winners and losers.
:clap::clap::clap:
Translation: Capitalism=good. However, the fundamental approach to an ideology can be prone to creating more problems than it solves. That goes for capitalism too.
Similar threads
